Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

The Chair amended the order of business at this point and moved directly to the Chair’s Address to the Planning Committee.

The Chair announced that an Officer Update Note had been circulated to the Committee and could be viewed alongside the agenda on the Council’s website.

Members noted that any late representations on the applications would be summarised by the Officer in their presentation.

Lastly, the Chair informed the Committee that the applicant for agenda item 5.2 – 2019/1008/COU – The Barn, 7 Sherburn Street, Cawood had requested that consideration of the application bedeferred; the Senior Planning Officer explained the reasons why. It was proposed, seconded and agreed by the Committee that the item should be deferred to a later date.

A copy of the Register of Interest for each Selby District Councillor is available for inspection at www.selby.gov.uk.

Councillors should declare to the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest in any item of business on this agenda which is not already entered in their Register of Interests.

Councillors should leave the meeting and take no part in the consideration, discussion or vote on any matter in which they have a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Councillors should also declare any other interests. Having made the declaration, provided the other interest is not a disclosable pecuniary interest, the Councillor may stay in the meeting, speak and vote on that item of business.

If in doubt, Councillors are advised to seek advice from the Monitoring Officer.

Councillor K Ellis declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 5.2 – 2019/1008/COU – The Barn, 70 Sherburn Street, Cawood as he had received an email from Cawood Parish Council about the application, but as the matter was not being discussed at the meeting, the disclosure was not required.

Councillor M Topping declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 5.1 – 2019/0759/FUL – Land Adjacent A163, Market Weighton Road, North Duffield as he had attended a meeting of North Duffield Parish Council at which the application was discussed. He was aware of local issues but had not expressed an opinion on the scheme, and as such his consideration of the matter at the meeting would not be affected.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee meetings held on 9 and 23 December 2020.

The Committee considered the minutes of the Planning Committee meetings held on 9 and 23 December 2020.

Members suggested a number of amendments as follows:

9 December 2020

Minute item 55.1 - 2019/0668/OUT - Pasture Cottage, Main Street, Thorganby

To remove the word ‘of’ in the resolution.

Minute item 55.2 - 2020/0821/FUL - Land Adjacent, Village Hall, Main Street, Church Fenton:

To remove the word ‘under’ in the first paragraph.

To remove the redundant word ‘approve’ in the resolution.

An additional point was made by Members that, as was requested in the minutes, the reasons for refusal had not been brought back to the Committee as the applicant had subsequently withdrawn the application.

23 December 2020

Minute item 59.2 - 2020/0449/HPA - 2 The Glade, Escrick, York

To amend the resolution to include an additional point asking Officers to formally draft the reasons for refusal based on those reasons suggested by the Committee which already form part of the resolution.

RESOLVED:

To approve the minutes of the Planning Committee meetings held on 9 and 23 December 2020 for signing by the Chairman, subject to the amendments detailed above.

The Planning Committee considered the following planning applications:

Application: 2019/0759/FUL

Location:Land Adjacent A163, Market Weighton Road, North Duffield

Proposal: Proposed erection of 5 dwellings and associated infrastructure

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought before Planning Committee as the development was a departure from and therefore contrary to the requirements of the Development Plan. Officers considered however that there were material considerations which would support a recommendation for approval.

The Committee noted that the application was for the proposed erection of 5 dwellings and associated infrastructure.

The Committee asked questions in relation to the future use and landscaping of land to the north west of the site and its red line boundary, car parking and previous permissions for use of the land and their relation to the Council’s five-year land supply.

The Democratic Services Officer read out a representation on behalf of Nancy Gray, objector, which spoke against the application.

Councillor Karl Arthur, Ward Member, was invited remotely into the meeting and spoke against the application.

Vikki Sykes, agent, was invited remotely into the meeting and spoke in support of the application.

Members debated the application and acknowledged that it was not a straightforward scheme and went on to express their concerns as it was a departure from the Council’s Development Plan, and a site that had been given initial permission when the Council did not have a five-year land supply. The Committee agreed that it should be deferred and looked at again by both the applicant and Officers, as there were alternative and more affordable proposals that the local community would be more likely to support.

The Committee also asked for more information in general from Officers on sites that had been agreed previously when there had been no five-year land supply.  

It was proposed and seconded that consideration of the application be deferred. A vote was taken on the proposal and was CARRIED.

RESOLVED:

That the application be DEFERRED in order for Officers to undertake further work on the proposals and examine alternative options, including a more affordable type of housing that would be better suited to the local community.  

Application: 2020/0768/FUL

Location:Land to the Rear of 5 – 13, Stutton Road, Tadcaster

Proposal: Erection of a detached dwelling

The Planning Officer presented the application which had been brought before Planning Committee at the discretion of the Head of Planning.

The Committee noted that the application was for the erection of a detached dwelling.

The Committee asked questions in relation to previous applications on the site having been dealt with via delegated powers, changes to the footprint, design and layout of the scheme, resolution of issues around legal ownership of the land, parking and the overshadowing of limited private amenity space of neighbouring properties.

Members debated the application and felt that the application should have been dealt with via delegated powers. The Committee agreed with the Officer’s reasons for refusal and the views expressed in the Planning Inspector’s report that there were no differences between the current application and that which had been submitted and refused previously.  

It was proposed and seconded that the application be refused. A vote was taken on the proposal and was CARRIED.

RESOLVED:

That the application be REFUSED for the reasons set out in paragraph 7 of the report.